Prev: Is there a compact camera that will take a series of shotsquickly?
Next: How to use remote to control video with Canon SX1 IS?
From: whisky-dave on 9 Dec 2009 08:25
"RichA" <rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> Because they'd corner the market? Hardly.
> Their aspirations about
> replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass.
It has Pro's want their equipment working straight out of the box.
How many Pro camera usuers would want to have to install anti-virus stuff on
camera or have to get buying it and checking it's still working. and having
that might not work or will need another new driver that nmight corrupt the
system meaning you'll
have to re-install the OS yet again.
>It comes down to
> design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism
> that to some appears attractive,
Check out some pros see what they prefer.
> but from a functional aspect, sucks.
> Think about pro cameras then think about newer small cameras and what
> is the small camera's main problem? Lack of up front functionality,
> lack of buttons. Everything is buried in menus or simply lacking.
> This is why despite the constant griping by some there ARE no small,
> pro-level DSLRs.
> Apple doesn't use buttons. Everything is in multi-layed menus
Pretty much teh same as windoze in fact most say thay windoze 7 is emulating
look of the previous mac OS Tiger.
> If the could commit the keyboard to a screen, likely they
> would. This is not the kind of hamstrung functionality people who
> know better want in a camera. They want the functions available to
> them with a one-button push, ideally.
> Which is why pro cameras will stay large.
Do pros really want camera bodies filled with buttons.
From: whisky-dave on 9 Dec 2009 08:31
"dirk van lut" <gerber_dirk(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
> "John A." <john(a)nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
>> On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 07:05:54 -0500, Shawn Hirn <srhi(a)comcast.net>
>>>In article <4b1c9c09$0$1648$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>,
>>> rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>> RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
>>>> >replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
>>>> >design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism
>>>> Rich is an effete snob who doesn't realize that Apple's computers are
>>>> designed in California. And judging by Apple's stock price they seem
>>>> to be doing quite well.
>>>Let's see. As of close this past Friday ...
>>>APPL = 193.32
>>>HP = 36.80
>>>DELL = 13.46
>>>Apple shareholders are laughing all the way to the bank.
>> The iPod & iPhone are to thank for that.
> It is definetly not due to their iMac screens. I was thinking switching
> from PC to Mac for photoprocessing.
> After reading all the negatives in the Apple usegroups on the quality of
> Apple screens (not the computer bit) I decide to stay with a standard PC
> (less $$$) and de hi-quality screen.
But iMacs don;t pretend to have pro screens, I have a 24" iMac and it's fine
for what I do, but I'm not a pro. If you're a pro you'd know what you're
and buy a pro screen which costs more than the iMac which of course
the computer bit.
if I were a pro I wouldn;t consider an iMac as my main machine.
Notice how even Apple use the word Pro. There's no Pro level iMac.
From: nospam on 9 Dec 2009 11:51
In article <slrnhhvjgh.l94.t-usenet(a)ID-685.user.individual.de>, Martin
Trautmann <t-usenet(a)gmx.net> wrote:
> > the battery should last 5 years, so that's something that might happen
> > once in the lifetime of the machine, if that. chances are you'll sell
> > it before the battery needs replacing.
> Apple does claim that the newer models do have much better battery
> performance - but they still do stick to a warranty limitation of six
> months only.
wrong. the warranty is one year, just like anything else, with an
optional extension for 3 years.
> If they don't trust their own promises, why should anyone else?
where in the world do you get that they don't trust their own promises?
From: George Kerby on 9 Dec 2009 14:58
On 12/8/09 12:19 PM, in article hfm5bl$gq3$1(a)adenine.netfront.net, "nsbm"
> If you are willing to pay Apple prices for the obsolete hardware they
> package so prettily in order to run a Linux cloned OS then you will not
> tolerate anything negative about Apple, despite the fact that Apple still
> does not have a fully functional 64 bit OS software development environment
> compared to, uh, Microsoft from several years ago.
> If you are a na�ve photographer who has swallowed the Apple Kool aid and
> realize that you cannot calibrate ANY Apple monitor correctly without
> additional, very expensive obscure third party purchases then you may have
> already shot yourself and are dead and cannot read this.
> However if you think you are calibrating your Apple monitor in situ
> correctly then you are the na�ve soul you are, bless your heart.
Apple also invented what's commonly known as 'paragraphs', in case you
didn't know that.
From: Ray Fischer on 10 Dec 2009 00:52
nsbm <fac_187(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>If you are willing to pay Apple prices for the obsolete hardware
The latest quad-core processors are "obsolete"?
>package so prettily in order to run a Linux cloned OS
Mac OS X has nothing at all to do with Linux.
>then you will not
>tolerate anything negative about Apple,
Apparently you won't tolerate the facts.
> despite the fact that Apple still
>does not have a fully functional 64 bit OS software development environment
It's called "XCode".